Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - 02-13-2001City Council Meeting February 27, 2001 Agenda Item Ill CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes 11���� Study Session D February 13, 2001- 4:00 p.m. INDEX ROLL CALL Present: Ridgeway, Proctor, Glover, Bromberg, Mayor Adams Absent: Heffernan (excused), O'Neil (excused) 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR - None. 2. CENTERLINE PRESENTATION. City Manager Bludau stated that the purpose of having this item on the agenda was to educate the City Council and staff on the Centerline project. He added that the City did not comment on the first draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), but that comments were due on the Supplemental draft EIR by February 14, 2001. He stated that at the current meeting, Bill Hodge with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) would be providing a presentation. Mayor Adams confirmed that comments from the Environmental Quality Affairs Committee (EQAC) had also been provided to the City Council. Mr. Hodge, Director of External Affairs, OCTA, provided the City Council with a copy of OCTA's Long -Range Transportation Plan, entitled FastForward 2001. Mr. Hodge stated that it is predicted that Orange County will face steady growth, which will cause traffic conditions to worsen. In response to population, housing and employment projections, he stated that OCTA has looked at potential impacts on the regional transportation system in Orange County. He stated that this resulted in the FastForward Plan, which extends OCTA's vision to 2030 and is expected to be approved in 2002. Mr. Hodge outlined the goals for the FastForward Plan and they included maintaining mobility levels, providing more transportation choices, expanding non - automotive travel, optimizing the present system, meeting inter- County travel needs, linking land use and transit planning and addressing expanded tourist opportunities. He also listed the accomplishments made by OCTA to date, which included a restructuring of the bus system, increasing the capacity on Metrolink, studying the Centerline rail system and spending money on local streets and freeways. He also highlighted some of the short -term goals of the OCTA. Mr. Hodge explained that the Centerline proposal is a 29 -mile long corridor that runs from the Fullerton Transportation Center to the Irvine Volume 54 - Page 87 [No report] City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 I1�117 sR1 Transportation Center. He stated that the system would have 33 stations and would connect with the Metrolink commuter rail system and John Wayne Airport. Mr. Hodge stated that there are four Minimum Operable Segments (MOS), with MOS North proposed to run from Fullerton to The Block shopping center in Orange, MOS Central from the Disney Resort to Park Place in the Irvine Business Complex and two options for MOS South, both of which would run from Irvine to the South Coast Metro area. He stated that the four MOSs will be considered by the OCTA Board on February 26, 2001. Mr. Hodge stated that the corridor chosen is the most heavily populated and contains the largest series of activity centers in the County. He additionally listed some of the major employment centers in the area. Mr. Hodge stated that Orange County's population density is deceptive, with Santa Ana being the second densest city in the State, behind only San Francisco. He added that one in every one hundred Americans lives in Orange County. Mr. Hodge stated that the employment density in the corridor is approaching the level of Boston and added that other cities with such denseness have active and successful rail systems. Mr. Hodge concluded his presentation by stating that the public hearing for the Centerline project was held on January 22, 2001, the decision to select an MOS will take place on February 26, 2001 and preliminary engineering should begin in the Fall of 2002. Mr. Hodge stated that outreach is ongoing for the FastForward plan, with plans to adopt it in the Spring of 2002. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that the employment figures for the Irvine Spectrum are currently 55,000, with 70,500 expected by 2003. He pointed out that the handout listed this number as approximately 33,500 and questioned the accuracy of the other information provided in the presentation. Additionally, Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway agreed that the alignment of the MOSs were well located, but that he sees a problem with Orange County developing more jobs than housing and the corridors into the County becoming the congestion problem. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway asked if the OCTA bus system makes money. Mr. Hodge responded by saying that the fares do not cover the entire cost of the system, but that the relative value of maintaining the public transit system versus the costs of maintaining other transportation options makes it a good bargain. Mr. Hodge added that fares are expected to pay for approximately 30% of the Centerline system by 2020, with other funds being used to help cover operating costs. Council Member Glover stated her support for the Centerline system. She asked if the highway funds were protected from supporting the Centerline system. Mr. Hodge confirmed that the highway funds would continue to be spent on highways. Council Member Glover asked if staff had reviewed the EIR. Mayor Adams noted that EQAC had reviewed the EIR. Volume 53 - Page 88 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX Council Member Glover stated that she was specifically interested in knowing if Planning had reviewed the EIR to consider the relationship of the Centerline project with John Wayne Airport and plans for the future of Newport Beach. Mayor Adams noted that EQAC did not feel that the EIR adequately identified the impacts on John Wayne Airport. He added that he shares the same concern. Senior Planner Alford confirmed that staff reviewed the supplemental EIR and the major concern is the segment that would begin near the Disney Resort and end near the John Wayne Airport. Council Member Bromberg stated that the EIR was reviewed in depth by EQAC at their meeting of February 12, 2001. He encouraged the council members to look closely at their report. He stated that it's a good report, and nearly all- inclusive. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway confirmed with Senior Planner Alford that staff would communicate the message from EQAC to the Regional Administrator of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Chief Executive Officer of OCTA. Robert Hawkins, EQAC Chairman, stated that EQAC's duties include commenting on EIR documents. He added that the comments by EQAC were already forwarded to the FTA and OCTA, and that they included the concern about the EIR failing to recognize the significant impacts on the John Wayne Airport. Mr. Hawkins complimented Senior Planner Alford for his input on this issue and added that EQAC's detailed comments can be found in the section of the report discussing the project description, alternatives and the need for specificity. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway complimented EQAC's report for covering the issues related to the John Wayne Airport. He additionally confirmed with Mr. Hawkins that EQAC looked at the economic and negative impacts of the Centerline project, but that it was not included in the report. Mayor Adams confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the report from EQAC would be adequate for the City to preserve its rights in the event that the City Council wanted to pursue issues in the future. Mayor Adams suggested that a cover letter be included that indicates the City's support for the comments in the report. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway agreed and complimented EQAC for going ahead with the review. Mr. Hawkins acknowledged Jennifer Wynn, Tom Hyans, Elaine Linhoff and Marge Pantzar. Mayor Adams thanked Mr. Hodge for his presentation and EQAC for their prompt action. Assistant City Manager Wood confirmed that EQAC does have the authority to comment directly on EIR documents from outside agencies. Volume 53 - Page 89 City of Newport Beach Study Session' Minutes February 13, 2001 3. Mayor Adams stated that he's only concerned about protecting the City's rights in the future. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that in situations where time allows, EIR documents should come to the City Council first. Mayor Adams agreed and noted that EQAC is an advisory committee only. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED MEASURE S GUIDELINES AND REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY (contd. from 1/9/01 AND 1/23/01). Mayor Adams stated that the City Council is planning to take twelve straw votes at the current meeting. He stated that these votes will provide input to staff so that a policy can be developed and then voted on at an upcoming City Council meeting. Additionally, Mayor Adams noted the correspondence received from Allan Beek and suggested that staff take his comments into consideration when preparing the draft policy. Mayor Adams introduced the first topic, the trip generation rate, and explained that staffs recommendation is to use the average peak hour rate of the land use because it is consistent with the intent of Measure S. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that he had suggested at a prior meeting that the average of the land use and the adjacent street be used, but that he has since learned that it is too complicated and too technical. Mayor Adams reminded everyone that the policy that will be developed will only be used to determine if a general plan amendment should go to the voters, and that it will not be used for traffic impact studies or EIR documentation. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway's question, Mayor Adams stated that using the average peak hour rate of the land use would trigger votes more easily than the average peak hour rate of the adjacent street. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated his support for using the land use. Mike Erickson, RBF Consulting, technical advisor to the Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber of Commerce is recommending that the average peak hour rate of the adjacent street be used because it is more closely indicative of the impacts on the roadway system. Mayor Adams stated that the language of the measure really needs to be the guiding -light for the City Council. Council Member Proctor agreed with Mayor Adams' earlier comments that the policy is only setting a trigger point for an election. He added that it's the obligation of the City Council to create a policy that is consistent with what the voters intended when passing Measure S. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the trip generation rate topic. Volume 53 - Page 90 INDEX Measure S Guidelines (68) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX Mayor Adams stated that in regards to the second topic, trip rates and tables, Measure S indicates that the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Manual should be used, but it doesn't give direction on how. He added that at a prior meeting, he recommended that staff determine the peak hour generator rates for all of the land uses in the ITE Manual. He stated that this table would become a part of the policy, and would be updated as the ITE Manual is modified. Mayor Adams suggested that the table include information on what decisions staff made in developing the various rates, and why. City Attorney Burnham suggested that a legend could be used. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the trip rates and tables topic. Mayor Adams introduced the third topic, land use for trip rate calculation. City Attorney Burnham stated that if the City can enforce restrictions on a property, the trip rates generated should be used. He added, however, that if the City can't enforce the restrictions, then the highest trip rate for a permitted use should be used. In response to Council Member Glover, City Attorney Burnham added that there may have to be some consideration given to the current use and the proposed use. Council Member Glover additionally confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the guidelines being developed for Measure S would be independent of any provision of the State Zoning and Planning Act, or other state laws. City Attorney Burnham stated that he hoped to clarify the topic of land use trip rate calculation further with staff. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the staff recommendation is to calculate the peak hours based on the highest rate of any land use to the maximum extent that is allowed in that entitlement, even if the property is being used for less. Mayor Adams agreed that it was an obvious conclusion and would disallow a property owner from avoiding a vote, and then later increasing the use intensity of the property. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the land use for trip rate calculation topic. Mayor Adams introduced the fourth item, morning or evening rates. He confirmed with Transportation/Development Services Manager Edmonston that staff is recommending that the highest weekday rate be used. Mayor Adams added that the City Council should be aware that by supporting the staff recommendation, they are really exempting churches on their weekend use. Council Member Proctor stated that Measure S does not give guidance on Volume 53 - Page 91 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX the topic. City Attorney Burnham agreed. Council Member Glover stated that some churches are located in the heart of residential areas, and exempting them could cause a problem. She additionally suggested that how general plan amendments are presented to the City Council needs to be changed, but stated that this would be a separate discussion. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the morning and evening rates topic. Mayor Adams stated that he was not in support of the staff recommendation for the fifth topic, definition of floor area, because the definition of floor area pertains to the intensity clause in the measure. He added that the only need to define floor area in the measure is for the 40,000 square foot intensity threshold. City Attorney Burnham stated that he had received similar comments and agreed with the change. Per the request of Council Member Proctor, Mayor Adams explained that the ITE Manual should not be used to define floor area because floor area has to do with intensity and not with traffic. Further, he stated that the gross floor area should be used. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway agreed that using gross floor area rather than net floor area would be the simplest. Mayor Adams noted that it is the conservative approach. He received general consensus from the City Council to use the code definition of gross floor area. Mayor Adams introduced the sixth topic, residential uses. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that he agreed with the staff recommendation to not include floor area when considering residential uses. He stated that the number of dwelling units should be looked at only and not the floor area of those dwelling units. Mayor Adams explained that the three thresholds of Measure S are peak hour trips, dwelling units and square feet. He stated that the policy should specify if residential uses should have one threshold or two thresholds. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the residential uses topic. Mayor Adams introduced the seventh topic, parking structures. He stated that staff is recommending that parking structures not be included in the floor area calculation. He noted a letter from Susan Skinner - Caustin, which supported including the parking structures in the floor area calculation. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway further noted a letter from Allan Beek, also supporting the inclusion of parking structures. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway noted that Measure S is only related to traffic and, therefore, only gross floor area workspace should create the trigger mechanism. City Attorney Volume 53 - Page 92 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 11011 s/:1 Burnham added that supporting the staff recommendation is consistent with not using floor area when calculating the threshold of residential uses, because neither parking structures nor residential floor area generate traffic. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that the supporters of Measure S should consider the repercussions of supporting the use of parking structures and its lack of consistency with the intent of the measure. Council Member Bromberg stated his support for counting parking structures as floor area. He explained that the stated purpose of Measure S is traffic, but that the measure references both intensity and density. He stated that he doesn't feel it violates the single subject rule. Council Member Proctor agreed that there isn't a single subject rule problem, but he said he has a hard time understanding how a parking structure could increase traffic. Mayor Adams stated that he didn't think the voters meant to include parking structures in the calculation of floor area. He said that parking structures are generally not included when calculating floor area. Nancy Skinner, 1724 Highland Drive, explained that the reason her daughter, Susan Skinner - Caustin, wrote in support of including parking structures in the floor area calculation is because it minimizes the amount of allowable floor area for office or other uses which, in essence, reduces traffic. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the parking structures topic. He noted, however, that not everyone was in agreement and two council members were absent, so requested that staff include alternate language in their final report so that the item could be discussed further. Mayor Adams introduced the eighth topic, the look back provision. City Attorney Burnham stated that the City Council has three options to consider and that staff is recommending using the effective date of the measure, which was December 15, 2000. He explained that this option is most consistent with the intent of the measure, which is to prevent piecemealing. He stated that another date that could also be used would be the date the Notice of Intent was published, which was July 30, 1999, and noted that the only general plan amendment approved after that date was the Extended Stay America project. From information received by the City Attorney on court rulings, Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated his understanding that if an initiative is silent on retroactivity, then it's best to go prospectively. Council Member Bromberg stated that he used to support going back ten years prior to the date of approval, but is now in support of the staff recommendation. He stated that the way the initiative is written, it doesn't make it consistent or logical to use a retroactive look back provision. Council Member Proctor agreed with Council Member Bromberg and Volume 53 - Page 93 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX Attorney Burnham for providing the case law. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the look back provision topic. Mayor Adams introduced the ninth topic, credit for trip reductions. City Attorney Burnham pointed out that with or without a credit for trip reductions, the square foot threshold would still apply. The staff recommendation was to not use a credit for trip reductions. Council Member Bromberg stated that it doesn't seem logical to penalize a developer who reduces traffic. Mayor Adams stated that another way to look at it is that it would allow a property owner or developer to take advantage of something done by a prior property owner or developer. He added that other thresholds also have the capability of triggering a vote. After general discussion, he noted that it could effect the statistical areas that are almost maxed out. Council Member Glover asked how the credit for trip reductions related to the land use for trip rate calculation topic. City Attorney Burnham stated that if credit is given for trip reductions, uses could be intensified in a statistical area. He stated that staff will take this into consideration when drafting the policy. Mike Erickson, RBF Consulting, technical advisor to the Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce, stated that traffic impact is the only thing that should be considered. He supported using a credit for trip reductions because it provided a benefit to someone who reduced trips. Mayor Adams explained that if a developer proposes a project with fewer trips than the entitlement, then a credit is given for the trip trigger because there are less trips. He added that the discussion on whether to use a credit for trip reductions is more about the look back provision and the intensification in a statistical area. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway further explained that the trip reductions are applied to the traffic analysis and the fees paid. City Attorney Burnham stated that the credit would be given when prior amendments are looked at. After further discussion, Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the credit for trip reductions topic. He requested that staff include information in the staff report on the issues brought up. City Attorney Burnham confirmed that he would have alternate language that the City Council could choose to adopt. Nancy Skinner stated that credit for trip reductions should be used, since the goal of Measure S is to reduce traffic. Volume 53 - Page 94 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 Mayor Adams pointed out that including the credit would actually increase traffic because it would allow some very small projects in some specific instances to go through without a vote. Council Member Proctor added that the language in Measure S supports not using a credit for trip reductions. Mayor Adams introduced the tenth topic, general plan data. City Attorney Burnham stated that staff is recommending that a table be used to keep track of the thresholds in each of the 49 statistical areas, as a way of determining if an amendment would require voter approval. Mayor Adams confirmed that it should make it easier for an applicant to determine if their project might require voter approval and for staff to write the report. Planning Director Temple stated that it's a way to do the accounting on an ongoing basis, rather than creating it each time. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the general plan data topic. Mayor Adams introduced the eleventh topic, amendments pending a vote. He stated that the staff recommendation was to not count amendments pending voter approval for purposes of the look back provision. Council Member Proctor asked if amendments pending voter approval from the same entity should be counted. City Attorney Burnham stated that amendments pending voter approval should not be considered prior amendments, and this would not change regardless of the vote results. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway agreed that the intent of Measure S supports the staff recommendation. Per the inquiry of Council Member Proctor, City Attorney Burnham stated that not including amendments pending voter approval from the same entity doesn't allow for piecemealing because of the limited period of time from City Council approval to the vote. City Attorney Burnham confirmed that he didn't feel it was necessary to count amendments pending voter approval from the same entity. Mayor Adams stated his concern for different entities wanting to use up the allowed development in a statistical area first, and which entity would be considered before the other. Allan Beek suggested that prior amendments would be determined by the general plan amendment number. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the amendment pending a vote topic. Mayor Adams received general consensus from the City Council for their support of the staff recommendation on the twelfth topic, applicant information, which was to provide the applicant with guidelines and opinion. Volume 53 - Page 95 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes February 13, 2001 PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ADJOURNMENT - 6:00 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on February 7, 2001, at 1:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 53 - Page 96 INDEX CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes ����� Regular Meeting February 13, 2001 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX STUDY SESSION - 4:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None. RECESSED AND RECONVENE AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Absent: None Pledge of Allegiance - Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway. Invocation by Mrs. Marianne McDaniel. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION,ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): Council Member Bromberg stated that a business owner of a men's store in his district tried to get a permit to put up a sale sign in his window and that this process took him 2.5 hours. He indicated that there should be an easier way to get something like this done more expeditiously. Council Member Glover requested that the agreement between the City and the Newport Theater Arts Center be placed on the February 27 agenda. Regarding Greenlight issues, Council Member Glover asked what the timeframe was for General Plan Amendments (GPA) to go before Council, adding that Council would now need more time to review them. She requested that an item be placed on the February 27 agenda that gives information on the timing and how Council would become more familiar with the project when initiating a GPA. Council Member O'Neil reported that two GPA initiations will be on the February 27 agenda that deal with St. Mark Presbyterian Church and Our Lady Queen of Angels Church. He stated that a newspaper article discussed his active involvement with Our Lady Queen of Angels Church and read a statement that assured that his decision on this matter will be guided by facts. Volume 54 - Page 97 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Council Member Heffernan stated that there may be a traffic safeW issue at the Edwards Theater since the driveway onto San Miguel has low -lying bushes that precludes the sight path from the left side. He requested that this be discussed with The Irvine Company. Council Member Heffernan announced that Council is looking for applicants for the Telecommunications Committee and that interested individuals can contact the City Clerk's office for an application. Mayor Adams asked staff to include an item after this portion of the agenda that would allow Council Members an opportunity to report on committee activities. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES /ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 2001, THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 2001 AND THE SPECIAL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 2, 2001. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. 2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration, and direct City Clerk to read by title only. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION 3. RECONFIRMATION OF PARS SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT PLAN. Adopt Resolution No. 2001 -8 reconfirming the City's participation in the subject plan. 4. EXTENSION OF TERM OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASK FORCE. Adopt Resolution No. 2001 -9 extending the term of the Affordable Housing Task Force. ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION 5. WEED AND RUBBISH ABATEMENT MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGE. Introduce Ordinance No. 2001 -2 amending Chapter 10.48 of Title 10 of the NBMC pertaining to weed and rubbish abatement and pass to second reading on February 27, 2001. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 6. BAYSIDE DRIVE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DMc ENGINEERING. 1) Approve Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with DMc Engineering for $9,800; and 2) authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute Amendment No. 2 to the agreement. Volume 54 - Page 98 INDEX C- 3284/Res 2001 -8 PARS Retirement Plan (38/66) Res 2001 -9 Affordable Housing Task Force (24) Ord 2001 -2 Weed and Rubbish Abatement (41) C -3198 Bayside Drive Storm Drain Improvements (38) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX Removed at the request of Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway. 8. AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MEC ANALYTICAL SYSTEMS, INC. Approve an amendment to Professional Services Agreement with MEC Analytical Systems, Inc. for $23,241. 9. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN OF THE DOVER DRIVE 36 -INCH ZONE II WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT AND STREET REHABILITATION FROM CLIFF DRIVE TO WEST COAST HIGHWAY (C- 3394). Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a Professional Services Agreement with AKM Consulting Engineers (AKM) for $64,278 to prepare plans and specifications for the construction of 1,500 feet of 36 -inch and 24 -inch water transmission main in Dover Drive and the street rehabilitation from Cliff Drive to West Coast Highway. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIONS 10. Removed at the request of a staff member. 11. Removed at the request of Council Member Bromberg. 12. ADOPTION OF DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM FOR FEDERAL FY 2001 -02. 1) Approve the DBE Program for the City of Newport Beach for federal fiscal year beginning October 1, 2000 and ending September 3, 2001; and 2) authorize the Public Works Director to sign the policy. 13. AMENDMENT TO CITY'S 2001 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM. Amend the City's Legislative Platform for 2001 reflecting a change to Section Five relating to Aviation. 14. REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE FROM NEWPORT BEACH FILM FESTIVAL. Approve a budget amendment (BA -027) transferring $30,000 from General Fund unappropriated surplus to the Economic Development special department expense account, and approve assistance to the Film Festival in that amount. 15. FUNDING FOR DEFERRED LANDFILL EXPENDITURES FROM FEBRUARY 1998 STORMS. Approve a budget amendment (BA -026) for $75,347.69 payable to the County of Orange for deferred landfill disposal fees. 16. TRANSFER FUNDS FROM PACIFIC LIFE FOUNDATION AND THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM TO FIRE DEPARTMENT DISASTER PREPAREDNESS. Approve a budget amendment (BA -029) in the amount of $15,303, transferring grant funds from Pack Life Foundation and the Emergency Management Assistance Grant Program to the Fire Department for Disaster Preparedness; and authorized the automatic carry -over into next year's budget, if the grant funds are not completely utilized this year. Volume 54 - Page 99 C -3381 Newport Harbor Sediment Analysis (38) C -3394 Dover Drive Water Main Replacement and Street Rehab (38) Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program (74) 2001 Legislative Platform (48) BA -027 Newport Beach Film Festival (40/68) BA -026 Deferred Landfill (40/44) BA -029 Disaster Preparedness (40/41) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 S24. NEWPORT DUNES STORM WATER DIVTI,RSION SYSTEM. 1) Adowt Resolution 2001 -10 relating to supporting the Newport Dunes Storm Water Diversion System; 2) approve the Plans and Specifications for the Newport Dunes Storm Water Diversion System; 3) authorize the City Manager to direct staff to complete the following: (a) informal bidding associated with the construction of the Diversion System; (b) communication with the Orange County Sanitation District, the Newport Dunes Resort, the Hyatt Newporter Resort, and other related parties regarding the Diversion System; (c) award of a contract to the lowest responsible bidder to construct the Diversion System; and (d) negotiations with the OCSD and the watershed interests to prepare an operating and maintenance agreement associated with the long -term operation of the Diversion and return to City Council for approval of this /these agreement(s); and 4) approve Budget Amendment (BA -030) accepting $40,000 from the Orange County Sanitation District and $40,000 from the County of Orange for the construction of the Diversion System. Motion by Mavor Pro Tern RidLeway to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (7, 10 and 11) and noting the addition of the second recommendation on Item 16 that was inadvertently left off the agenda. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR IMPLEMENTATION OF AN INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE SYSTEM. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway requested and received clarification from Building Director Elbettar that the interactive voice response system allows people who have applied for permits, requesting inspections, or have questions or concerns about business licenses to interact with the permit system 24 hours a day, seven days a week by phone, email, or fax. He described how a person would be directed through the database and added that staff could also leave a message on the system that an applicant can retrieve. Council Member Glover stated that it would be helpful if staff puts a message on the voicemail indicating that they are out of the office or on vacation. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway expressed the opinion that the City's phone system is difficult to use and requested that staff look into updating the phone system. Motion by Mavor Pro Tern Ridaewav to direct the City Manager to sign the contractual agreement with Tele -Works Incorporated for installation of an Interactive Voice Response System in the amount of $105,595. Volume 54 - Page 100 INDEX Res 2001 -10 C -3297 BA -030 Newport Dunes Storm Water Diversion System (38/40) C -3398 Interactive Voice Response System (38) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Jim Hlldreth, 120 The Grand Canal, expressed the opinion that the voicemail system is a great idea if it works and suggested that the system also be used by the Harbor Resources Division to obtain information regarding onshore and offshore moorings, piers, and docks. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 10. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 8, 2001. Regarding Item 1 (Newport Riverboat Promoters), Assistant City Manager Wood reported that the Planning Commission was not sure if installing a Plexiglas screen would be enough, so they extended the Director's Use Permit until August and required the applicant to install the Plexiglas barrier. The Commission will review the matter in August to see if more conditions need to be added prior to approving a use permit. Regarding Item 2 (The Schuleiun Building), Ms. Wood stated that this was continued to allow the applicant to explore parking options. Regarding Item 3 (Sterns Architecture), Ms. Wood noted that this item was previously before Council and was referred back to the Commission with changes. She indicated that this was approved by the Commission. Regarding Item 4 (Rex Brandt Trust), Ms. Wood stated that this was continued to February 22 to allow the neighbors and applicant an opportunity to work on privacy, landscape, and parking issues. Regarding Item 5 (Caf6 Il Farro), Ms. Wood reported that their request to upgrade their Alcohol Beverage License was approved since the Caf6 is designed to be just a restaurant with no bar. Regarding Item 6 (General Plan Amendment Initiations), Ms. Wood stated that the three GPA initiations were recommended and will be on the February 27 agenda. Regarding Item 7, (Proposed Development Plan Review Procedures), Ms. Wood reported that this was continued since they ran out of time. In response to Mayor Adams' question regarding Item 6, Ms. Wood reported that the office project at MacArthur and Bristol is subject to Greenlight. Ms. Temple added that neither of the church requests cross the square footage threshold, but noted that they have not conducted the traffic analysis yet. She added that the Our Lady Queen of Angel Church project may require additional analysis since they are proposing to install a double -lane for the grammar school. Volume 54 - Page 101 INDEX Planning (68) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 In response to Council Member Proctor's gvastion, Ms. Wood stated that the recusal in Item 5 is an error. She explained that the recusal happened in Item 4 since Commissioner Kiser represents one of the neighbors. Council Member Glover requested that GPA initiations be itemized in the future. Ms. Temple reported that GPA 2001 -011 (A) is a request for an additional 400,000 square feet in an office development, adding that their entitlement is 180,000 square feet. Regarding the St. Mark Presbyterian Church project, she confirmed that this is a change in zoning designation from open -space to a church use. Regarding the Our Lady Queen of Angels Church .project, Ms. Temple reported that they are requesting additional floor area beyond the General Plan limit. Motion by Mavor Adams to receive and file. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 11. UNSCHEDULED VACANCY ON THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD AND VACANCY ON THE ORANGE COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT BOARD. Council Member Bromberg stated that he and Council Members O'Neil and Heffernan interviewed candidates for the Civil Service Board. He reported that, even though they are nominating Marilee Jackson and Bert Carson for the position, the five candidates were very impressive. He encouraged them to keep their applications current since another vacancy will occur next year. Motion by Mavor Pro Tern Ridgewav to confirm the Ad Hoc Appointments Committee nomination of Marilee Jackson and Bert Carson to fill the unscheduled vacancy (term expires 6/30/05) and schedule the appointment to be made on February 27, 2001; and directed the Ad Hoc Appointments Committee to review and conduct interviews for the vacancy on the Orange County Vector Control District Board (City of Newport Beach representative). The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that he received an invoice for a Volume 54 - Page 102 `11117 �R1 Civil Service Board/ OC Vector Control District Board (24) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 residential pier permit on January 29, even though the fee referral number (RP80100011) was changed. He believed that the change is unwarranted since its designation has not been changed. He stated that the City uses Standard Drawing 603 for platforms and steps which he feels is the structure that Harbor Resources Division Manager Melum removed and concluded that Mr. Melum believes that the City - installed ladder is safer. He asked if the City will be removing the remaining structures on the Grand Canal and replace them with City - installed ladders. He stated that Council has yet to ratify the City- installed ladder as a safe, approved, and appropriate structure for boat access on the Grand Canal, and added that the City Attorney has refused to go on record regarding the City's liability. Bill Wren, 1118 East Balboa Boulevard, Balboa Theater, reported that they are ready to resubmit its plans to the Building Department and anticipate that groundbreaking will occur mid -May. He stated that they hired a professional fundraiser, are forming a Capital Campaign Committee, have raised $129,000, and have about $1.4 million in the bank. He discussed the Theater's arts education program and stated that the program is held every Tuesday at 10:30. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17. AWARD OF NON - EXCLUSIVE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION FRANCHISE TO CST ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. (contd. from 1/9/01). City Manager Bludau stated that this is a standard public hearing for a non- exclusive solid waste collection franchise. He reported that the City currently has 15 of these agreements and that CST Environmental has met all of its requirements. Mayor Adams opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, Mayor Adams closed the public hearing. Motion by Mavor Pro Tern RidLeway to adopt Ordinance No. 2001.1 granting a Non - exclusive Solid Waste Franchise to CST Environmental, Inc. In response to Council Member Heffernan's concerns, Mr. Burnham stated that there is a typographical error regarding the 10.5% cap in Section 4.a.1 (Franchise Fees), and that he will discuss possibly increasing the $1 million commercial general liability insurance with the Risk Manager. Council Member Heffernan also asked what the City policy is regarding roll-off dumpsters and how long they can remain on public streets. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Volume 54 - Page 103 INDEX Ord 2001.1 CST Environmental/ Non - exclusive Solid Waste Collection Franchise (42) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 18. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S USE PERMIT Na 69, ACCXSSORY OUTDOOR DINING PERMIT NO. 76 - EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING FULL SERVICE SMALL SCALE EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT INTO A NEIGHBORING TENANT SPACE, INCREASING THE INTERIOR SEATING FROM 12 SEATS TO 21 SEATS, INCREASING THE EXTERIOR SEATING FROM 8 TO 12 SEATS AND PROVIDING SEPARATE GENDER RESTROOMS [2801 EAST COAST HIGHWAY] (contd. from 1/9/01 & 1/23/01). Planning Director Temple reported that this expansion came about due to Starbucks Coffee not providing gender - separate restrooms. She noted that, when the project was originally approved, it was very early in its business and the City did not fully understand the nature of the operation. They were allowed to open its business if a single employee restroom was made available to the public; however, over time, Starbucks was unable to accommodate patron usage due to limitations in its floor plan. She reported that patrons began using the restroom in other businesses and the City received many complaints about this. She stated that the Building Department felt it was very important for Starbucks to come up to the minimum standards of the building code and provide accessible restrooms for its patrons. Ms. Temple reported that staff determined that Starbucks did not have sufficient space and encouraged them to look for other opportunities. She indicated that the space next door to them became available, but this meant that Starbucks would need to expand the existing restaurant even though there are many other eating and drinking establishments in the area and there is a heavy demand for parking. She stated that the Planning Commission focused on the parking problem and, therefore, imposed significant conditions beyond what staff originally proposed. She reported that one of the conditions is to relocate the existing glass storefront on the second tenant space in order to reduce the number of interior seats and increase the number of exterior seats. She stated that this was proposed with the idea that many of the patrons favored the outdoor use. Ms. Temple stated that Starbucks is also required to provide supplemental parking during the morning peak period. Starbucks initially accepted these conditions; however, they chose to appeal the Planning Commission's decision in order to preserve their administrative remedy in the event they cannot accomplish the two conditions. Ms. Temple indicated that staff is still recommending the action of the Planning Commission, even though the building/landowner is unwilling to allow modifications to the building frontage. She noted that staff does not feel this is an important condition since the number of overall seats will not change. Regarding parking, Ms. Temple reported that Starbucks was not able to sign agreements with any of the adjoining property owners; however, they have come up with two unconventional arrangements with Francis -Orr Fine Stationery and the Republic Bank for an additional 18 parking spaces, which exceeds the highest code requirement for this restaurant. In the event Council accepts this arrangement, she pointed out that alternate conditions of approval have been generated which require that Starbucks submit an annual status report on its off -site parking agreements; provide a detailed Volume 54 - Page 104 Planning Director's Use Permit 69/ Accessory Outdoor Dining Permit 76/ Starbucks Coffee/ 2801 E. Coast Hwy (68) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX parking management plan; and allow the Planning Commission to review the permit in six months to see whether the parking arrangements are providing the needed solution during the morning hours. Ms. Temple added that the Republic Bank has 9.5 years remaining on its lease and the stationery store owns its own land. Mayor Adams stated that he is not sure there is enough information to make a decision on this, especially since there is nothing that indicates what the parking demand is on a Starbucks. Ms. Temple confirmed that there is no on -site parking survey and noted that the "full service small-scale eating and drinking establishment" category is a special category that arose as an effort to facilitate small restaurant developments. She stated that the Council at that time chose to give significant parking requirement relief and allow them to use retail parking rates. She reported that, when the codes were changed, the requirements were increased but were still substantially less than what most conventional restaurants would demand. She indicated that Council may want to revisit this because some locations require more parking than what the code requires. Mayor Adams reported that the applicant wants the increased seating to help justify the increased financial burden. He noted that Council is making a decision that is going to impact the parking demand in the area based on the applicant's belief of what an "unreasonable financial burden" is, but does not see any evidence to justify this. He also asked if there is data from other Starbucks to show the ratio of square footage of public space relative to the number of seats. Ms. Temple stated that this Starbucks and the one across from City Hall are early prototypes and have very little seating area, where newer Starbucks tend to have an area for retail and a separate area for casual seating. In response to Mayor Adams' questions regarding the creative parking solutions, Ms. Temple stated that Starbucks would cease to be in substantial compliance if any of the leases were terminated and would need to return to the Planning Commission for further consideration, imposition of conditions, or revocation of the permit. She reported that this is why staff wanted to include the condition that requires them to submit a yearly report relative to the parking agreements. Mayor Adams noted that this would be an added burden on staff over a long term. Mr. Burnham noted that Council has the ability to impose additional parking requirements if a finding is made that the use would not have any adverse impacts on the neighborhood. Council Member Glover stated that the City has basically precluded outdoor dining at most of the restaurants. Further, the City has become very stringent about the ability to enjoy the City and have fun. She pointed out that snow in Chicago does not stop people from bringing tables and chairs outside if a glimpse of sun is showing. She reported that there are parking arrangements like this throughout the City and that it is nice to have coffee shops in the City since they close at night and do not cause problems for the residents. She believed they have adequate parking and hoped that Council will allow them to make their improvements. Volume 54 - Page 105 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 In response to Council Member Prxtor's question, Ms. Temple reported that the Planning Commission based their additional parking conditions on their observation. Additionally, Starbucks is in an area where there are a number of small eating establishments that tend to be a magnet since there is signalized access. Mayor Adams opened the public hearing. A.J. Cool, 17700 Newhope Street, Fountain Valley, Starbucks Coffee Company, stated that this process began because the City wanted them to provide restrooms; however, they resisted allowing customers to use the existing restroom for safety reasons. He stated that, against their better business instinct, they pursued the facility next door because it was the right thing to do. They also worked with Planning staff for about six months to come up with a design that met code standards, provides restrooms, and upgrades the facility with plush seating and a fireplace. However, Commissioner Kranzley appealed the plan because of parking concerns. He indicated that most of the conditions were reasonable except for the requirement to move the storefront (Condition 34) since the landlord opposes it and the requirement to supply five off -site parking spaces. Mr. Cool assured Council that Starbucks is not expanding the store to expand business since sales reached their peak in 1996 when competition moved in. He indicated that they are just hoping to retain customers. Mr. Cool believed that the expansion will not make the situation worse since they will be basically keeping everything the same. If Starbucks does not expand, however, someone else will move into the tenant space next door who will have more employees and customers to try to find parking for. He relayed his efforts to find alternate parking solutions and indicated that he is talking with Francis -Orr Fine Stationery and the Republic Bank relative to cooperative agreements, but indicated that it may not be possible to get a long term agreement with either entity. Mr. Cool stated that the solution may not make a significant difference since the problem primarily comes from people making a "mad dash" in and out of the business, even though there is almost always parking underneath the building. He indicated that they could possibly provide better signs to encourage parking underground. Mr. Cool also pointed out that Goldenrod has street sweeping twice a week, which eliminates half the parking from 8:30 to 12:30, and suggested that the schedule be adjusted to the afternoon hours or condensed (9:30 to 11:30). He believed that the first step is for everyone to figure out ways to cooperate. In response to Mayor Adams' questions, Ms. Temple confirmed Mr. Cool's statement that there was a verbal agreement that Starbucks would allow customers to use their restroom. However, due to the type of business, the building code now requires that handicap accessible, gender- separate restrooms be available. She noted that Starbucks was essentially allowed in the beginning to start business in a format similar to a dress shop or retail store. Mr. Cool indicated that sales from 1996 to 2000 have decreased 5 to 10 %, and have decreased 15% in the last month since Coffee Bean & Tea opened. Regarding having a hiring freeze on employees, he stated that he could explore this with the City if this was to be a condition in the permit. Volume 54 - Page 106 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 RICO 1. In response to Council questions, Mr. Cool stated that parking in the area during the morning hours is tough and that a lot of the problem is due to people trying to make a left turn onto Goldenrod. He confirmed that they will be open until midnight on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday nights, but noted that this is their current operating hours. Regarding Council Member Heffernan's suggestion to move storage to the underground level and conduct the expansion with restroom facilities on the upper level, Mr. Cool stated that storage is not the issue. He explained that customers using the current restroom pose a problem since they would be able to walk directly through the kitchen area, which does not provide employees a controlled environment. Noting that the Starbucks is located in his district, Council Member O'Neil stated that Starbucks is a successful business where a lot of locals congregate, that they are doing what they can to resolve the situation, and that he likes a lot about what is being done. However, he feels that people will probably not use the underground or interim off -site parking. He expressed concern that the Planning Commission looked at this but may not have heard the testimony regarding the possible cooperative parking agreements, the opportunity to work with the City on the street sweeping schedule, or the fact that the landlord will not allow modifications to the building. He indicated that he is not sure if he has enough information to make a decision. He noted that, if this is approved tonight with the additional conditions, the Planning Commission will become the enforcement and Starbucks will need to go back to them if there is noncompliance. He stated that it may be worthwhile to have this go back to the Planning Commission anyway. He indicated that, if he were to vote on this tonight, he would probably support the Planning Commission and not approve it. Chris Bennett stated that he is excited about Starbucks' expansion and its change from a coffee bar to a coffee house. Further, he sees it as a huge asset for the neighborhood. He requested that Council be flexible since Corona del Mar (CdM) does have a lot of parking problems. He believed that, if a parking study were to be done and all businesses were required to have the right number of parking spaces, CdM would look like what Irvine was planned to look like and it would lose some of its charm. He indicated that people will eventually stop going to Starbucks if parking becomes inconvenient, but this should be something that is worked out in the market. Don Glasgow, Chairman of the Corona del Mar Business Improvement District, stated that he remembers that this corner 10 years ago had nothing but dilapidated buildings and there was no parking problem. However, everyone has helped this situation come about by granting use permits to Seattle's ,Best, Brueger's, and Starbucks without thinking about what the total impact would be on the corner. He stated that everyone needs to find a way to keep these great businesses in the area and noted that Mr. Cool has come up with some innovative ideas. He added that it may be a good idea that this go back to the Planning Commission since they may not have heard all of Mr. Cool's rationale. He emphasized that this corner needs to be figured out because the City may be faced with more of these requests and added that outdoor dining is essential to the success of these types of charming villages. He stated that parking will always be a problem. Volume 54 - Page 107 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 WIN) �►:� Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, suggested that the employees park in the underground parking lot if the general public does not use'it and that Starbucks provide a place to lock up bicycles. Regarding outdoor dining, he noted that the code prohibits noise after 10:00 p.m., but Council could allow this if Starbucks does not create noise and there are no complaints. He stated that, if the business is kept clean, he does not have a problem with them, but recommended that they provide restrooms. Mr. Cool emphasized the difficulty in connecting their permit to their parking problem, especially if the permit is to be on a year -to -year basis and since they are going to invest a substantial amount of money to expand this facility. Regarding Mr. Hildreth's comment, he indicated that their six tandem parking spaces could be allocated to employees of businesses in the area and that, if employee parking is not managed, this could also be a step in the right direction. Regarding possibly having this go back to the Planning Commission, he reported that they have been leasing the second space for a year and that the landlord has been waiting for them to resolve this so he could get a long term tenant for that space. He indicated that the landlord will start marketing the space soon. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway noted that the empty theater that is a block away from Starbucks is grandfathered with 200 parking stalls, but does not have one parking stall on its property. This automatically makes CdM deficient by 200 parking spaces. He clarified that the Planning Commission approved the project but imposed additional conditions. He stated that he agrees with everything Mr. Cool has said and knows that they have lost business. He added that he also spoke with two Goldenrod residents who do not oppose the project and believes that it is an asset to the community. He agreed that the corners need to be dealt with and that the cumulative affect may not have been looked at when these businesses were approved. He expressed the opinion that the Planning Commission and Council are overstepping its bounds when it talks about Starbucks' operations, particularly with the Planning Commission requiring Condition 34. He noted that Mr. Cool has sought and obtained parking agreements, has agreed to creating a parking management plan, and has agreed to a yearly review. He believed that Council has more than adequate information to make a decision. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Rid¢eway to approve the appeal and the project, with amendments to Conditions 9 and 35, deletion of Condition 34, and addition of Conditions 36 and 37, as follows: A minimum of nine parking spaces shall be provided for the exclusive use of the subject facility and shall be designated by appropriate signage or pavement marking to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer and the Planning Director. Prior to implementation of the increase in the number of seats, a parking management plan shall be approved by the Planning Director that depicts the method of compliance with the conditions of approval related to the parking issues. The parking management plan shall include the following items: a. On -site posting of all available parking. b. Posting of off -site parking areas in conjunction with all off- Volume 54 - Page 108 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 INDEX site parking agreements. C. Methods of educating customers on the availability of parking. d. Mandatory employee use of the on -site tandem spaces. e. Use of on -site parking by other businesses. 35. Supplemental off - street parking shall be provided during the morning peak hours (7 a.m. to 10 a.m.) through an off -site parking agreement with nearby commercial property owners or businesses. The agreement shall be approved by the Office of the City Attorney. The location of the off -site parking shall by approved by the Planning Director. 36. The applicant shall submit a status report regarding all off -site parking agreements to the Planning Department on an annual basis from the effective date of this permit. 37. The Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission for compliance with the conditions of approval six months from its effective date. Council Member Glover stated that she was once a small business owner and that the City needs to be proud of its businesses and treat them with respect. She noted that there are vacant businesses throughout the City that she would love to have a Starbucks in her district. She agreed that the Planning Commission has overstepped its responsibilities and that she does not want to tell Starbucks how to run its business. Noting that she normally follows the lead of the Council Member whose district the project is in, she stated that she cannot do that in this case. Council Member Heffernan stated that he has struggled with this project for weeks because he loves the promotion of the village concept and how people walk or ride bicycles to Starbucks; however, there is a lot of congestion which creates hazards and tension during the peak use hours. He indicated that he cannot understand how all these uses ended up on the same corner and believed that this expansion conflicts with the village concept the City is trying to promote in CdM. He added that approving this would make parking worse since not everyone will be walking there and since Starbucks will be providing more seats for more patrons. He indicated that he will be opposing the motion. Council Member Proctor stated that he completely supports the motion and cannot see how insisting on an additional restroom has led to outdoor seating and all the other discussions. He believed that the Planning Commission and Council is trying to micromanage Starbucks. Council Member Bromberg added that Starbucks is also going to be part of the 2004 Project and that he will also be supporting the motion. Mayor Adams stated that Starbucks' proposal is for a good use, but to ignore parking problems is not the right thing to do. He indicated that he cannot support this without knowing that the conditions are going to be effective. He expressed the opinion that he does not feel this is micromanaging and Volume 54 - Page 109 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 that this is what was done when he sat on the Planning Commission. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor Noes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Mayor Adams Abstain: None Absent: None 19. USE PERMIT 3626 (BUZZ) REVOCATION APPEAL (ERIC RAMESON AND HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT GROUP, APPLICANT/ APPELLANT) - 3450 VIA OPORTO - AN APPEAL BY THE APPLICANT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVOCATION OF USE PERMIT 3626 (contd. from 12/12/00 & 1/23/01). City Attorney Burnham reported that staff met with Buzz representatives last week. He stated that they submitted an application that will be considered by the Planning Commission for an amendment to the existing use permit to modify the business concept. He suggested either referring the revocation back to the Planning Commission so they could take action on the application and possibly factor in the revocation proceedings into that process, or deferring the revocation hearing for 60 or 90 days pending final action by the Planning Commission on the application. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to refer this item back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Adams opened the public hearing. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CONTINUED BUSINESS 20. APPOINTMENTS TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CITIZENS AFFAIRS COMMITTEE. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway to appoint the following members from each City Council District, and confirm the appointments recommended by EQAQ (District 1) Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway's appointment of Louis Van Dyl. (District 2) Council Member Proctor's appointment of Jim Miller. (District 3) Council Member Glover's appointment of Gale Demmer. (District 4) Mayor Adams' appointment of Richard Rivett. Volume 54 - Page 110 1011 �►:� Use Permit 3626/ Buzz Revocation Appeal/ 3450 Via Oporto (88) EQAC Appointments (24) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 (District 5) Council Member Bromberg's appointment of Jack Callahan. (District 6) Council Member O'Neil's appointment of Laura Dietz. (District 7) Council Member Heffernan's appointment of To Be Determined. EDC Representative Carol Hoffman (appointed by EDC) At Large (7) Marge Pantzar Phillip Lugar Nancy Raney Christopher Welsh Three members still needed Community Association Environmental Expertise Elaine Linhoff Tom Hyans Barry Allen One member still needed Jennifer Winn Barry Eaton One member still needed The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Mayor Adams suggested that staff bring back a report that clarifies the EQAC appointment process. 21. MARGUERITE AVENUE AT SANDCASTLE DRIVE SIGHT DISTANCE. Transportation and Development Services Manager Edmonston reviewed the staff report and recommendations. Regarding the suggestion to remove a portion of the monument wall and construct a retaining wall to hold back the landscaping of the slope, he reported that this would not provide as much sight distance as providing a safe area for the motorist on the side street to. pull forward and view up the hill. He indicated that staff is recommending that Council approve Option A and work with the Association and property owners to relocate the large plants that are the main impediment and to stripe in a right turn lane for northbound traffic. He clarified that this would provide an area for the people turning right onto Sandcastle to slow down without worrying about being tailgated by through traffic and would also allow drivers on Sandcastle to nose their cars further out into the intersection to see up the hill before committing to the left turn. Volume 54 - Page 111 Marguerite Avenue/ Sandcastle Drive Intersection (85) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 Council Member Heffernan noted that Robert Curci presented a letter which requested Options A and B. He requested and received clarification from Mr. Edmonston that the City currently does not have the Association's consent but a representative who has attended the Traffic Affairs Committee meetings indicated that they are interested in improving the sight distance for its resident members. He noted that the City will be covering the costs associated with this change. In response to Council questions, Mr. Edmonston reported that bike lanes are typically striped so that they are dropped prior to the beginning of the turn pocket and then picked up to the left side of the turn pocket. He noted that there are a lot cyclists on this street who sometimes take up the whole roadway. He stated that they may not be able to address all the cyclists, but Option A provides an area for them to get past the intersection and be out of the way of the cars that are nosing forward. Mr. Edmonston reported that moving the stop bar further into the street is not being proposed since paint does not stick well to or contrast with concrete and since motorists generally stop at the stop bar and then creep out. Motion by Mayor Adams to 1) select Option A [remove plants (other than groundcover) from the existing viewshed looking from Sandcastle Drive to the north and stripe a right- turn -only lane on northbound Marguerite Avenue] to increase sight distance at the intersection of Marguerite Avenue and Sandcastle Drive and monitor the results; and 2) direct staff to pursue the selected option with all affected property owners and the Harbor View Hills South Homeowners Association. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CURRENT BUSINESS 22. CONSIDERATION OF CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE, RECRUIT AND FILL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER POSITION. City Manager Bludau reviewed the staff report and stated that this allows the City to have someone on staff to conduct public outreach programs. He stated that the Public Information Officer's (PIO) first priority would be to deal with the General Plan Update process and come up with ways to engage the community. He indicated that the Human Resources Director conducted a salary survey which concluded that the proposed salary falls in the middle of salary ranges. Motion by Council Member Glover to authorize a Public Information Officer position with a salary range of $54,996 - $77,388, and that recruitment for the position be initiated in order to participate in planning Volume 54 - Page 112 RICO i Public Information Officer (66) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 and community outreach for the General Plan update process. Laura Dietz, 325 Cameo Shores, stated that she serves on the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee and that they have been struggling with its own outreach program. She expressed her support for a PIO and hoped that the various committees will also be able to utilize the PIO to help get their messages out to the community. In response to Council questions, Mr. Bludau reported that Brea has a five person staff, Irvine has a division, and other cities and water districts have PIO positions. He indicated that the PIO will be able to deal with airport issues and any other outreach program as directed by Council. Council Member Bromberg added that any successful corporation has many PIOs and stated that he hopes that this becomes a division in the future with more than one person staffing it. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 23. BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FUND THE OPERATION OF A TEMPORARY FIRE STATION IN NORTH NEWPORT BEACH. City Manager Bludau reviewed the staff report which deals with fire service in the John Wayne Airport area. He reported that response times were tracked for 30 days and it was concluded that only a 10% response time of five minutes or less was being met in that area. Based on that, he decided to place an interim fire station at the Radisson Hotel, which would cost $608,860 using overtime until the end of the year. If this is approved, he stated that Council will also want staff to execute a right -of -entry agreement for an interim station until a permanent station could be built. He indicated that it has always been the City's intent not to build a fire station until after the annexations occurred since the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) was already providing fire service; however, the City does not have this luxury anymore since a portion of the community is not being provided adequate fire service. In response to Council questions, Mr. Bludau indicated that the City would need to meet with Supervisor Tom Wilson to discuss reimbursement costs associated with the temporary fire station. He noted that the City did not reimburse OCFA for the services it provided to the City in this area. He added that the tax allocation from the Santa Ana Heights annexation will not offset the cost of the fire station, but the City can try to negotiate a different tax split on other annexed areas. Fire Chief Riley stated that they contacted the property owner of 2101 Dove Street regarding the right -of -entry agreement and they indicated that they are interested in providing a portion of their parking lot, rent free, for as Volume 54 - Page 113 1101)�// BA -028 Temporary Fire Station (40/41) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 long as it is available. He reported that they are looking at possibly expanding or selling the business. He indicated that the cost for this temporary facility would basically include utilities and a structure that meets housing requirements. He also discussed staffing utilizing either overtime personnel or hiring nine new permanent employees, which would initially save the City about $140,000 annually. Chief Riley stated that, if the City annexes the Santa Ana Heights area, OCFA will have no reason to relocate another fire station in that area since the County no longer needs to protect it. He confirmed that the City will be servicing Santa Ana Heights with the new facility and taking on the County's job in that area. He reported that, if there were no fire station at the Radisson Hotel, the areas near Campus, Birch, and Dove would be serviced by the Newport Center fire station. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to 1) ratify the decision of the City Manager to establish a temporary fire station to serve the airport area of Newport Beach; 2) approve a budget amendment (BA -028) in the amount of up to $608,860 to fund the development and operation of a temporary fire station to serve the airport area of Newport Beach and the unincorporated area known as Santa Ana Heights for the remainder of the 2000 -2001 fiscal year; 3) authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a right -of -entry agreement with the owner and/or tenant/lessee for the use of the parking area at 2101 Dove Street for an interim station location; 4) direct staff to work with the County of Orange and other property owners in the Santa Ana Heights /Airport Area to investigate locations for a permanent station location; and 5) direct staff to work with the County of Orange and the Orange County Fire Authority to examine ways to compensate the City for the provision of services to the Santa Ana Heights region to assure partial cost recovery of the budget amendment. At Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway's request, the motion was amended so that the second recommendation includes the hiring of nine permanent employees. Barry Eaton, 727 Bellis, reported that his wife suffered full cardiac arrest in a building on Dove Street. He stated that the paramedics took 10 minutes to get there and that his wife only survived because two men performed CPR on her until they arrived. He expressed his support of the motion and indicated that his wife has fully recovered. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None. ADJOURNMENT - 9:30 p.m. Volume 54 - Page 114 184013 �11 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes February 13, 2001 The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on February 7, 2001, at 1:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 54 - Page 115 INDEX